This essay proposes what it may be about stars (the
human
variety) which attracts us so much. It's also an inquiry into what it
may be which
drives
those (of us) who pursue becoming stars.

The people we designate as stars typically come from
the world
of film and popular
music.
Then there are also other arenas ie other genres in which
we designate stars: the world of fashion, the world of literature, the
world of sport, the world of
technology,
even the world of haute cuisine ... and others including
(although not as obvious) religion (Pope Francis is a
star, yes?) and science (Stephen Hawking is a star, yes?)
to name but two. And in each of these genres, there are people who
aspire to become stars. The allure of stardom
works
both on us who admire stars (and we can't get enough of them), as well
as on those of us who aspire to become stars (and they won't rest until
they've become one).

What exactly is it about our attraction to stardom? What is it about
stars and about becoming a star and about being a star which attracts
us? The fact that we're attracted to stars is almost indisputable,
given the evidence which is everywhere in our now global, international
culture. It's one of the very few, rare contemporary things about we
human beings
in which all societies are similar. Regarding being attracted to stars,
stars themselves, and stardom, what are the
origins?
(which is to say what provokes, allows for, and sustains the space in
which stardom is possible?). And as for the sacrifices required to
become a star, what
drives
the process?

Here's something to
consider
- which means it's something to try on for size (I'm being
very careful not to insinuate it's
"The Truth"
... and it may indeed contain elements of
truth):
stars and what they do and provide, compensate for what's
missing in our lives. Similarly it may be
true
(or not) that those of us who are
driven
to become stars ie those of us who aspire to become stars, are driven
to do so because we assume it'll provide what's missing in our lives -
which sometimes
works
and sometimes famously doesn't
work,
for example in the case of Charles Foster "Citizen" Kane
alias William Randolph Hearst who at the end of a long, rich life of
star-studded success and croesian wealth, would have
forsworn it all ie would have
happily
traded all of his amassed fortune for his childhood toy, his sled
Rosebud.

To be clear about this, there's
nothing
wrong
with aspiring to discover (with the
intention
of replenishing) what's missing, which in actuality (it would seem) is
what almost all we
human beings
are doing almost all the
time
anyway - at least those of us who are willing to
unflinchingly
tell
the truth
about it. That said, I assert if you ask yourself
why
we're so attracted to stars, and what attracts us to want to be stars,
it's because we have it (in the
background)
that stars and being a star compensate for what's missing. And if that
isn't the entire basis right there of our
love affair
with stars and with stardom, then I suggest it's at least a big part of
it.